President acting against a majority vote

[Rod]

Approximatly 4 years ago a motion was passed and acted upon, giving the members of our Volunteer Fire Department dress uniforms. Three years later (December 2010) under a different president a motion was passed stating,"these uniforms are only on loan and have to be given back to the Auxillary to the fire dept.upon leaving the Fire Dept.

One member retired prior to this motion and two after. 10 months after the last one retired ( average was 10 years service) the president of the auxiliary contacted these 3 retired firefighters and asked for their uniforms. At the Oct.2011 general meeting this topic was heavily discussed and by majority vote it was decided to let these 3 fire fighters keep their uniforms. 3 days after that meeting 2 received registered letters from the president demanding that the uniforms be returned within 15 days.

Questions:

As these uniform were originally given to the firefighters can the motion passed 3 years later be enforced? The only paperwork regarding these uniforms is an initialed checkmark beside what was given out.

What to do when the president acts against the majority vote?

[Guest Edgar]

What to do when the president acts against the majority vote?

Get a new president. See FAQ #20.

And forget about getting those uniforms back.

[Tim Wynn]

Approximatly 4 years ago a motion was passed and acted upon, giving the members of our Volunteer Fire Department dress uniforms. Three years later (December 2010) under a different president a motion was passed stating,"these uniforms are only on loan and have to be given back to the Auxillary to the fire dept.upon leaving the Fire Dept.

One member retired prior to this motion and two after. 10 months after the last one retired ( average was 10 years service) the president of the auxiliary contacted these 3 retired firefighters and asked for their uniforms. At the Oct.2011 general meeting this topic was heavily discussed and by majority vote it was decided to let these 3 fire fighters keep their uniforms. 3 days after that meeting 2 received registered letters from the president demanding that the uniforms be returned within 15 days.

Questions:

As these uniform were originally given to the firefighters can the motion passed 3 years later be enforced? The only paperwork regarding these uniforms is an initialed checkmark beside what was given out.

What to do when the president acts against the majority vote?

There's no rule of parliamentary procedure that says the decisions adopted must be fair, moral, or even legal. If an assembly wants to adopt a motion to go kick a dog, it may do so without violating any rules of procedure. If it wants to give clothes away and then, years later, demand them back, it may do so. As for questions about the ability to legally enforce such a decision, consult an attorney.

As for the president acting in contrast to the will of the assembly, you should start by adopting a motion censuring him for his action.

[Trina]

Approximatly 4 years ago a motion was passed and acted upon, giving the members of our Volunteer Fire Department dress uniforms. Three years later (December 2010) under a different president a motion was passed stating,"these uniforms are only on loan and have to be given back to the Auxillary to the fire dept.upon leaving the Fire Dept.

One member retired prior to this motion and two after. 10 months after the last one retired ( average was 10 years service) the president of the auxiliary contacted these 3 retired firefighters and asked for their uniforms. At the Oct.2011 general meeting this topic was heavily discussed and by majority vote it was decided to let these 3 fire fighters keep their uniforms. 3 days after that meeting 2 received registered letters from the president demanding that the uniforms be returned within 15 days.

Questions:

As these uniform were originally given to the firefighters can the motion passed 3 years later be enforced? The only paperwork regarding these uniforms is an initialed checkmark beside what was given out.

What to do when the president acts against the majority vote?

Well, it is certainly possible to rescind a motion that was adopted in the past. HOWEVER, this can only be done to the extent that the earlier motion has not been fully carried out. Common sense and a Kindergarten-level appreciation of fairness will tell you that, with respect to those people who were already given uniforms under the terms of the earlier motion, that motion was carried out.

To look at it another way, you shouldn't make motions about the disposition of someone else's property, and expect to be able to carry them out. That gets into legal problems.

About the president... first, apologize to those people who received the letters from him/her. And consider some form of discipline against the president.

[Tim Wynn]

To put it another way you can't make motions about the disposition of someone else's property.

Yes, you certainly can. There's no parliamentary rule against adopting a motion to go steal someone else's car and sell it on CraigsList.

About the president... first, apologize to those people who received the letters from him/her. And consider some form of discipline against the president.

Another approach might be to order the president to apologize.

[Trina]

Yes, you certainly can. There's no parliamentary rule against adopting a motion to go steal someone else's car and sell it on CraigsList.

Yeah -- that's why I edited what I wrote at first -- however, apparently not quickly enough to retract my error .

[Rod]

The Dec 2010 motion was," the Auxiliary would now loan uniforms to fie fighters with the understanding that they would be given back upon leaving the fire department ".

When would this new motion become in effect?

Will the terms of this new motion automatically include the fire fighters who received their uniforms under the original motion adopted 3 years previous "to give uniforms to all the fire fighters who are members of our volunteer fire department"

[Trina]

The Dec 2010 motion was," the Auxiliary would now loan uniforms to fie fighters with the understanding that they would be given back upon leaving the fire department ".

When would this new motion become in effect?

Motions take effect when adopted.

Will the terms of this new motion automatically include the fire fighters who received their uniforms under the original motion adopted 3 years previous "to give uniforms to all the fire fighters who are members of our volunteer fire department"

Of course not. Further, it sounds as though the wording of the new motion doesn't even attempt to go back and undo anything done under the old motion. Why would anyone interpret it that way? The uniforms already given to fire fighters in the past are the property of the recipients, and are no longer in the hands of the Auxiliary to be loaned to anyone.

Further, if the old motion was an ongoing policy, rather than just authorizing a one-time distribution of uniforms, it should have been rescinded or amended, which requires a higher vote margin than just passing a new motion from scratch.

[Tim Wynn]

The Dec 2010 motion was," the Auxiliary would now loan uniforms to fie fighters with the understanding that they would be given back upon leaving the fire department ".

When would this new motion become in effect?

Will the terms of this new motion automatically include the fire fighters who received their uniforms under the original motion adopted 3 years previous "to give uniforms to all the fire fighters who are members of our volunteer fire department"

The motion goes into effect upon adoption. I don't see how it affects the previous motion, because the parameters of the first motion are not clear. Do the firefighter members get all the uniforms they want or just one each? Does this extend to new firefighter members or just those at the time of the adoption of the motion?

[Rod]

Originally they were issued a short sleeve shirt, slacks, and belt. Throughout the next 2 years motions were passed which gave them a long sleeve shirt, tie, tie clip. They are given only one set. The only parameter of this motion was that they had to meet the requirements of the fire department. When New firefighters were accepted into the department they were given a complete uniform by the Auxiliary

The new resolution passed Dec 2011has only added " the uniforms have to be given back to the Auxiliary when the fire fighter no longer belongs to the fire department

[Tim Wynn]

Originally they were issued a short sleeve shirt, slacks, and belt. Throughout the next 2 years motions were passed which gave them a long sleeve shirt, tie, tie clip. They are given only one set. The only parameter of this motion was that they had to meet the requirements of the fire department. When New firefighters were accepted into the department they were given a complete uniform by the Auxiliary

The new resolution passed Dec 2011has only added " the uniforms have to be given back to the Auxiliary when the fire fighter no longer belongs to the fire department

If the effect is to amend the motion that was already adopted, the vote requirement for adoption is greater than a majority vote. See RONR (11th ed.), p. 18.

[Trina]

... the original motion adopted 3 years previous "to give uniforms to all the fire fighters who are members of our volunteer fire department"

The Dec 2010 motion was," the Auxiliary would now loan uniforms to fie fighters with the understanding that they would be given back upon leaving the fire department ".

The new resolution passed Dec 2011has only added " the uniforms have to be given back to the Auxiliary when the fire fighter no longer belongs to the fire department

Well, what did the new motion actually say? Is the quoted language precise, or just an approximation? That would help determine if the new motion was explicitly attempting (however foolishly) to get back uniforms that had already been given out, or was only changing the policy for the future.

In any case, since you said in one of your posts: "When New firefighters were accepted into the department they were given a complete uniform by the Auxiliary" that sounds like an ongoing policy. To change the policy would require rescinding the old motion and then passing a new one, or amending the old motion. The motion to rescind, or amend something previously adopted has more stringent voting requirements (see the citation provided by Mr. Wynn).

[Rod]

This is an approximation of the actual wording. I am currently away on holidays for the next 5 months and was away when the Dec 2010 motion was adopted. This was the way it was explained to me, i was under the impession that this was a new policy untill the phone calls to these retired firefighters began Oct 2011. I will get the exact wording of the motion and agenda adopted for that meeting.

I appreciate all the input, this issue has caused desention among the firefighters and split the Auxilliary. As soon as I get the exact information I will post it and hopefully find a resolution to present to the next general meeting, Nov 24 th.